NVS 310 vs Quadro FX 3700

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

FX 3700
2008
512 MB GDDR3
0.97
+51.6%

Quadro FX 3700 outperforms NVS 310 by 52% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in performance ranking10731149
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.02no data
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code nameG92GF119
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date8 January 2008 (16 years ago)26 June 2012 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,599 $159
Current price$256 (0.2x MSRP)$80 (0.5x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

FX 3700 and NVS 310 have a nearly equal value for money.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores11248
Core clock speed500 MHz523 MHz
Number of transistors754 million292 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)78 Watt20 Watt
Texture fill rate28.004.184
Floating-point performance280 gflops100.4 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length267 mm156 mm
Width1-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinNone

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR3DDR3
Maximum RAM amount512 MB512 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1600 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth51.2 GB/s14 GB/s

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-Video2x DisplayPort

API compatibility

List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model4.05.1
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA1.12.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

FX 3700 0.97
+51.6%
NVS 310 0.64

Quadro FX 3700 outperforms NVS 310 by 52% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

FX 3700 377
+53.3%
NVS 310 246

Quadro FX 3700 outperforms NVS 310 by 53% in Passmark.

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.97 0.64
Recency 8 January 2008 26 June 2012
Cost $1599 $159
Chip lithography 65 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 78 Watt 20 Watt

The Quadro FX 3700 is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 310 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA Quadro FX 3700
Quadro FX 3700
NVIDIA NVS 310
NVS 310

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.2 20 votes

Rate Quadro FX 3700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 65 votes

Rate NVS 310 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.